Why would you disregard all of the best evidence (positive witness I.D.s + ballistics proof) in favor of the much-less-reliable "timeline" type of evidence?
Makes no sense to do that. And yet, CTers are experts at doing just that.
Because it's not the "best evidence". You just call it that. Upon closer inspection it completely falls apart.
Eye witness testimony is the worst kind of evidence you can have. When 5 people watch an accident you will get 5 different versions of what happened. Yet you want us to believe that all these witnesses saw exactly the same thing. Give me a break!
And as far as ballistic proof is concerned, only Nicol claimed he could match one of the bullets taken from Tippit's body to the revolver. All other experts disagreed. And that's not all. You can't even prove that the revolver now in evidence is in fact the revolver that was taken from Oswald at the Texas Theater.
I don't care if it makes sense to you or not, but the events only happened in one way. And that means you will have to take all the evidence into consideration and not just what you like. Markham testified that she took her
regular bus to work at 1.15 from a bus stop on Jefferson. So, if Tippit was really shot at 1.15, what in the world was Markham still doing on 10th street?
If you can't even provide a plausible explanation for a simple question like that (instead of just dismissing it as "much-less-reliable "timeline" type of evidence") you haven't got a conclusive case at all.